Safety filters

When buying a lens, an important factor is the purchase of a protective filter. Why is this needed? As the name comes up - to protect the lens, and these are not just empty words, but sensible advice to all amateurs and professionals to protect their favorite lenses.

Type of lens filter

Type of lens filter

Protective filters protect against:

  1. Finger sticking hands of the front lens of the lens is the most common oversight of any photographer. Even having not a little experience behind me, I still see both my and my photographers lenses flogged with their fingerprints. Like it or not, sometimes you want to remove the protective cover from the lens, but it’s not there, and you bury a bare lens instead.
  2. From mechanical stress. Sometimes, the front lens is hit by a photo bag, shoulder, witness's chest at a wedding when shooting a ransom, etc. It is also practically impossible to protect yourself from this. Actually, the motivator for this article was the fact that I broke my protective filter on the corner of the bar counter when reporting. And if it were not for the protective filter, then the front lens would not have been sweet. Therefore, filters really protect against mechanical effects.
  3. From dust, dirt, liquids, etc. You can safely fasten the filter and not worry about the cleanliness of the front lens.

Do you really need a protective filter?

Yes, unlike specific polarizing, stellar, gradient and color filters, which are needed only for a narrow kind of use, a protective filter is desirable always worn on the lens... For example, a protective filter is 100 times cheaper than a lens, and a good lens costs a couple of thousand dollars. it will be a pity to scratch. In the event that the lens has been subjected to strong impact, then scratches and other unpleasant trifles will remain on the filter, which can be easily, painlessly, and most importantly, very cheaply replaced with a new one. You can also wipe the filter with any cloth and also don’t worry that the first piece of cloth that comes across will not leave scratches on the lens.

After installing the filter, the front lens can do exactly the same close with a protective black cover - that is, the filter has two threads on one and the other side. One is screwed into the lens, and the other imitates the same thread as on the lens - for example, for wrapping a hood.

Personally, I use protective filters with an ultraviolet absorbing layer, thus killing two birds with one stone. Protective filters are usually marked as neutral, clear, which usually looks like an English lettering. UV filters are labeled as UV (0), UV (C), etc. Different manufacturers have different designations. It is best to take protective filters with high light transmittance of 95-97% and multilayer coating. You can still read about polarizing filter.

Conclusions:

For expensive lenses, the presence of at least a protective or ultraviolet filter is not a luxury, but irreplaceable thing, which will extend the lens service. And as everyone knows, cameras change, and lenses remain for almost a lifetime.

Do not forget to press the buttons social networks ↓ - it is important for me. Thank you for your attention. Arkady Shapoval.

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 289, on the topic: Protective filters

  • Dmitriy

    please tell me what are the filters? I want to take a neutral gray with variable dimming, polarik, gradient and protective. If protective by and large it’s not fundamentally whose company then the rest I would like to clarify with you. Thank you

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, there are different ones. If you do not know the difference between them, then buying them is pointless.

  • Dmitriy

    you did not understand. Between those that I named, I perfectly understand the difference, I just wanted to hear which ones are better and due to what features. And I also forgot to include infrared in my "plan-list". Just a review by firms, because more expensive is not always better. for example, neutral gray and Kenko with variable dimming with a price of 3-4 thousand, or maybe there is some other analogue that is not inferior in quality (about this speech) thanks

    • Arkady Shapoval

      I will try to write an article about this.

  • Dmitriy

    thanks, I think many will be interesting

  • Qwerto

    Good day.

    I constantly read your photo blog. Very informative. And thank you for that.

    I would like a little more thoughts about filters in general. Because already rummaged through the entire Internet, and nowhere did I see complete information about various types of filters. For example, why do you need green or red or purple? What do they give? What can be achieved with their help?

    I shoot on film, I practically do not use processing.
    I would like a review ...

    With uv.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      As soon as you manage to make full-fledged examples of photos, the article itself will appear.

  • Artem

    Tell me please what filter to take for shooting landscapes in sunny weather with a good sky?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      I advise you to look towards gradient filters.

  • Victor

    Good morning. Arkady, in your opinion, is it possible to always have a polarik on the lens like UV? At what shooting is it contraindicated? And further. If you do not consider B + W filters (due to their high cost), then which manufacturer do you personally prefer?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      The polarik eats up the aperture of the lens, I would never use it as a protective filter. Cheap Hoya, Marumi are almost identical, I use them as an alternative. From more or less human, you can look at Kenko.

    • anonym

      It is impossible. This is the target filter. He is needed only when really needed.

  • Victor

    Then one more question. If you want to apply a polarik, do you screw it into UV or do a replacement? And thanks for the previous answer.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      I rarely use it, I put it in place of the protective one so that there is no unnecessary vignette.

  • Victor

    Thank you.

  • Vyacheslav

    "Mechanical influences" in the second paragraph)

  • Alexey

    And can a whale lens if you slap your fingers just wipe it with a cloth, in principle, I already did this several times and did not seem to find any scratches after that

  • Alexander

    Hello, Arkady. I purchased D7000 18-105 VR. I read your article on filters, comments on it. In principle, I found for myself (by finance) options for protective filters such as HOYA 67mm UV (C) or (O). There is an option with UV Pro1, which is slightly more expensive than UV (O). Help to decide between the last two. Still, consider the option with B + W? Thanks.

  • Katherine

    Tell me, what to buy a protective filter (from dirt, dust) on a whale lens?

    • Dmitriy

      If we talk about Ukraine, then it is easiest to buy Hoya from us. In this case, the version of UV (C) will be optimal, the difference from UV (0) will not be significant.
      If you have Canon, then whale 58 has a diameter and you need this one http://infoto.com.ua/filter/uv/hoya-hmc-uv-c–58-mm

  • R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№

    Here on the site of the site all the information about for which lenses and for what purpose to use them.

    http://hoyafilter.com.ua/products/hd/hoya-hd-uv.html

    • Alexander

      Thanks for the link.

  • Taras

    Arkady tell me my tele-n 200. I need an adapter on it to put a filter

  • Taras

    ?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      To install a protective filter on the specified lens adapter is not required, just find a filter with a diameter of 62 mm.

  • Taras

    thank you

  • Valery

    I use an inexpensive UV filter. 1.Protects the lens from scratches, protects from dust, moisture and dirt. 2.Blocks out ultraviolet light, which causes a blue cast in pictures. 3.Provides the effect of eliminating "haze" 4.Photos become saturated and contrast.

    • anonym

      The first is quite obvious. Everything else - well, if you want it so much, then yes.

  • Konstantin

    I do not agree with the author of the article! The “protective” filter seriously spoils the picture! And the more expensive the lens, the more noticeable it becomes. The point is to buy an expensive high-quality lens where engineers literally picked up glasses and coatings with a microscope and spoil it all with some kind of glass, which not only creates a layer of air between the glasses, which gives distortion, but also catches all sorts of unnecessary glare and the overall contrast decreases
    !!

    • Arkady Shapoval

      To do this, there are high-quality filters with excellent performance. If the owner of an expensive lens has the means to buy it, then buying a high-quality filter will not be a problem.

      • Konstantin

        Even the highest quality filter will spoil the picture! It may not be noticeable by eye, but on a good monitor it can be seen at once. The paradox is that basically I see this kind of "protection" on cheap kit lenses, which essentially cost like the same filters! I have never seen such a “protection” without a real need for a pros with expensive lenses (shooting in the field, in the desert, etc.)! This speaks of the literacy of marketers, manufacturers of these filters, who are trying to "convince" us that this is extremely necessary, and it is clear that it is much easier for beginners to sell such "protection" when buying a camera. Besides, I have never really seen any lenses killed due to damage to the front lens! By the way, this lens is much stronger than you might think and not so easy to break and scratch. And small scratches and medium dirt will not affect the pictures! But the “protective” filter is just glass and it is much easier to break it, and if broken, there is already a real risk of damaging the front lens with fragments. And the filter always gets dirty faster. it does not have dirt-repellent coatings. So I consider all these "protective" filters to be a waste of money! By the way, when buying a DSLR in Japan, they never offer a protective filter "in addition" like ours! There is even, in principle, no such thing as a "protective filter"! It says a lot!

        • Arkady Shapoval

          I shoot quite often, I can say that a good filter is pretty damn durable too. As for the lenses, scratches really have practically no effect on the quality of the images, but the lens itself looks aesthetically poor, and there may also be problems with its post-sale. An excellent protection option is a lens hood, which does not let anything unnecessary to the front lens.

          • Konstantin

            I agree that the lens hood will be much more useful and effective for protecting the front lens, and also does not spoil the picture!

          • Taras

            There is a golden rule: the farther away from the matrix / film is the damaged lens of the lens, the less noticeable are scratches, dirt, delamination of glued lens blocks on the photograph.

        • FineFoto.ru

          It seems to me, Konstantin, that you need to correctly complete the article! 90% of people do not understand the physics of light or glass, but they are not only professionals, but also writing and giving advice! I advise everyone to read books (including old ones), and not notes on the Internet and guesses! And if you are going to make these purchases, go to the manufacturers' websites and translate the text (descriptions), see technical specifications, compare the results if you want, etc., but do not ask a lot of funny questions. this suggests that further in the photo you will remain a loser.

    • Ivan

      I agree 100%, the most sophisticated protective filter “eats up” the light, which is never too much!
      And in economics: at a lens cost of say 2000 ye, the cost of a good filter is 150 ye. It is more correct to change the lens in five to ten years than to put an extra glass. And replacing the front lens on some lenses is not so expensive 100-200 ye.

    • anonym

      You shoot with your expensive lens only in the studio or in the forest, by the sea, in the rain, snow, on motocross, near waterfalls, in the field ... et cetera? Then get ready to wash the front end with gasoline, alcohol, carbon tetrachloride, petroleum ether, and other abominations, including isopropyl alcohol, after each shooting. After the tenth shooting and cleaning, you will receive a wonderful free, and most importantly, eternal soft-filter on your favorite expensive lens, which will immediately devalue the lens by an order of magnitude and all your expenses for such optics will go down the drain. It is better to lose a little, but keep a lot for a long time. Moreover, no one forces you to use the filter anytime, anywhere. This is done only when it is necessary to do it. At the last motocross I hid the camera in a special box, and I myself was saved from dust by a “petal” on my face.

      • anonym

        It’s right for yourself, so that your head doesn’t tear off, it’s better to walk in a spacesuit in many of the places listed) suddenly what’s wrong)

  • Novel

    Arkady hello! I recently bought a Nikon D5100 camera and, oddly enough, on Google’s first request, I got to your site which

  • anonym

    taught me to photograph. Your site is a very useful resource and the fact that you wrote somewhere that it is not profitable for you and want to close it. Imagine how many people you have helped and are still helping to take the first steps - this material is simply priceless. THANKS!

  • Dmitry

    Greetings. Does it protect the polarization filter from UV?

    • Konstantin

      Why protect the matrix of the digital apparatus from UV rays? or are you filming? for UV numbers, they’re not scary if that!

      • Dmitriy

        UV rays have great energy, if you shoot a laser show on the camera, then burn the matrix.

  • Novel

    Arkady, the Internet is full of reviews that Hoya HMC UV (0) is very poorly wiped from dirt. Do you have personal experience with such filters or verified information? I understand that there are more than horror stories on the Internet.
    What do you recommend, Hoya HMC UV (0) or MARUMI UV WPC? Is Marumi WPC a multi-enlightenment? how is it in optical properties compared to HOYA HMC, Marumi MC and DHG.
    Thank you

    • BB

      'WPC' in this case - 'water proof coat' - a water-repellent coating - it really works, when a drop hits it 'rolls off' the glass, it looks funny))

  • Victor

    Hello again, Arkady :) Another question arose. I have the idea of ​​buying a gradient filter. Do you use these filters? Confused by the idea of ​​how to follow the rule of thirds when composing the frame, if you use a round filter whose border is dark and light in the middle?

  • Eugene

    Hello Arkady
    I apologize for the stupid question, could you please recommend the filter. I took my first DSLR D3100 bought a Nikon 35mm f / 1.8G AF-S DX Nikkor lens, I shoot my friends: indoors, outdoors, on the beach and at night. I can't understand about “UV” whether the DSLR needs it, whether it really improves the picture, or if it only concerns the film. Need protection, good light transmission. Value for money (characteristics). Thank you in advance, waiting for an answer with no patience.

    • Konstantin

      You do not need a filter (read my post above)! UV digital SLR are not scary!

    • Anatoly

      Eugene. Listen. You bought a very good lens, and therefore buy a protective filter for it. Protective. It is from dust and splashes, raindrops, and other blunders (last May I photographed the baby, and his 11-year-old brother threw a cake at me ... Horror! If not for the filter, the lens would definitely be cranky.
      Perdically I wash all my filters (mine is just like crystal - they sell funds). I have no expensive ones, from the Soviet high-aperture (F \ 2,0) and not high-aperture (F \ 3,5) optics of the Kalainar type, etc. By the way, the lenses were supplied from the factory with filters, it seems, UV.
      About filters in general. A purely personal opinion. The polarists (even if they are very expensive, if cool) must have all of their DECENT (up to F \ 3,5, not dark!) Lenses. Without them, there are no high-quality landscapes, especially with (about, on) water. There are no normal pictures of coins, medals (a portrait on the street of a veteran, for example), lathes, crystal glasses, commodity (and even art) exhibitions, etc., which shines and shines.
      An amateur does not need ultraviolet and others. The exception is neutral, protective, but not devouring light. If you are sorry for money on a decent protective filter, then it is better to use a good quality hood.
      Follow up advice. I have a good photographic habit since childhood (quite rare, for example, I have never met my counterparts, even among the pros!) - I myself sew under a camera-body with a protective cover and under a camera with a staff and a protective cover cloth bags-pouches. On the lines. They VERY save from microscopic dust, which is enough in wardrobe trunks, bags. I will note it to non-ponders. Choose material for bags persistently, for a long time and persistently. We need one that does not attract dust by nature (without chemical fibers). Sew so that your bags are airtight - one hole-neck, and that's it. Wash often, but always by hand with a household cleaner. Rinse thoroughly. Dry without turning inside out. More often, gently so that they are not drawn into the hose, vacuum the bags. Treat with antistatic agent. But from the outside.
      I also have interchangeable lenses.

      • FineFoto.ru

        Here are the pros in pouches)! However, if there is no branded and good drying that draws all the dust, then a worthy advice! Truth! Vacuum cleaner and washing wardrobe cases and bags is a good thing! However, all the professional filmmakers, the largest rental studios in their life, have never done so. My advice is this: try to change all the lenses every 3-5 years, if you work a lot with them and just be careful, but without bestiality)

  • Victor

    Advice for Eugene (especially since Arkady does not mind communicating on his page). With a UV filter, you won’t gain anything in quality (in your shots). In the mountains, at sea - maybe. You will lose 3 percent of the light. It is mainly needed for protection from dust, water and fingers. Recently I looked at the results of testing a large number of filters. To the surprise of the authors themselves, the Hoya HMC UV (0) filter has bypassed such a famous brand as B + W.

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2011/09/protect-foto-filter/comment-page-3/

Versión en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2011/09/protect-foto-filter/comment-page-3/